= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
The_Jaded_One comments on Tentative Thoughts on the Cost Effectiveness of the SENS Foundation - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (19)
It can't be a few hundred because that would imply that the non-natural-causes death rate is about 20-30% of the natural-causes death rate, which isn't true. At least in the developed world.
I think it's more like a few thousand.
And driverless cars are on the way, which would reduce the death rate drastically.
If you have a 0.1% per year chance of dying "non-naturally", the probability of you surviving for 100 years is 0.999^100 = 90% which looks to be order-of-magnitude correct for contemporary Western countries. This implies that your chances to live for 500 years are 0.999^500 = 60%, for a thousand years -- 37%.
if P(life length=x) = p(1-p)^(x-1) with p=0.001, then E(life length) = 1/p = 1000. It's a geometric random variable.
Which is NOT A FEW HUNDRED YEARS